Commuter Rail Extension Alternatives Analysis - Transportation ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUNTYALTERNATIVES ANALYSISand difficult. With the exception of the Boronda Road/State Route 156/U.S. 101 interchange, andrecently completed San Miguel Canyon Road interchanges, all intersections on these segments ofU.S. 101 are at-grade.The Caltrans final draft 2002 Transportation Concept Report recommends either widening theexisting U.S. 101 to six lanes or providing equivalent capacity in a bypass of Prunedale.Improvements to U.S. 101 anticipated for the Caltrain Extension to Monterey County “No BuildAlternative” can be divided into two components—a safety and operational component and a capacitycomponent.U.S. 101 Safety and Operational Improvements—the Prunedale Improvement ProjectIn 2002, TAMC agreed to fund safety and operational improvements on the existing U.S. 101 Corridorthrough Prunedale prior to implementation of a separate capacity improvement project (widening orbypass) in the corridor. Safety and operational improvements on the existing U.S. 101 betweenRussell and Espinosa Roads and Crazy Horse Canyon Road/Echo Valley Road on U.S. 101 havebeen labeled the U.S. 101 Prunedale Improvement Project.The Prunedale Improvement Project will construct three new interchanges/overpasses alongU.S. 101 through North Monterey County at Russell Road/Espinosa Road, Blackie Road/ReeseCircle, and Crazy Horse Canyon Road/Echo Valley Road. Additional improvements will also be madeto the San Miguel flyover and to local roads throughout the corridor to improve access and localcirculation.The major suite of improvements is illustrated in Figure 3-1. The project is estimated to cost $259million and is largely funded in the State Transportation Improvement Program. Construction is slatedto start in 2009 and be complete by 2012. By itself, the Prunedale Improvement Program will notaddress traffic capacity shortfalls in the U.S. 101 corridor. The Traffic Operational Analysis SupplementalReport 1 for the Prunedale Improvement Project indicates that under the No Build CaltrainExtension Alternative, U.S. 101 will operate at LOS E and F under 2030 traffic conditions in the AMnorthbound and PM southbound directions, respectively, for most of the length covered by theproject. Northbound AM and southbound PM peak hour demand will exceed capacity by over 30percent.U.S. 101 Capacity Improvements—the U.S. 101 Prunedale FreewayBased on the above defined shortfall, TAMC projects a need for additional capacity on U.S. 101through the Prunedale corridor in addition to the short-term safety and operational improvements tobe constructed on the existing alignment. In 2002, TAMC committed to pursuing the Prunedale Bypassproject, Alternative 4E, to address the existing and projected capacity shortfall on this corridor.The project will replace the existing U.S. 101 facility with a new bypass freeway to the east ofPrunedale, with interchanges at Espinosa Road/Russell Road and Crazy Horse Canyon Road/EchoValley Road. This project is estimated to cost approximately $420 million to design and construct.1Caltrans District 6, June 2004.parsons CHAPTER 3: DETAILED DEFINITION OF ALTERNATIVES 49
CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUNTYALTERNATIVES ANALYSISFigure 3-1U.S. 101 Prunedale Improvement Project645188AA-017TAMC only expects completion of the Prunedale Bypass to be possible with the addition of new localfunding sources. New monies in the first 14 years of the plan would be devoted to completing environmentalreview and design of the project. Even with additional funding, TAMC anticipates constructionof this substantial project to be possible only within the outer years (2021–2030) of the 2005Regional Transportation Plan.State Route 156 WideningIntersecting U.S. 101 at the midpoint of the Prunedale Improvement Project is State Route (SR) 156.SR 156 is a two-lane highway serving as an east–west connector from U.S. 101 to SR 1 and theMonterey Peninsula. SR 156 becomes a four-lane highway for less than 2 miles along the southernparsons CHAPTER 3: DETAILED DEFINITION OF ALTERNATIVES 50
Page 4 and 5:
DRAFTCALTRAIN EXTENSIONTO MONTEREY
Page 6 and 7:
CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUN
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33: CALTRAIN EXTENSION TO MONTEREY COUN
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
show all

Commuter Rail Extension Alternatives Analysis - Transportation ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?